It can be concluded from the present judgment that no protection is afforded to the ideas, plots or themes under the Copyright Act, 1957. Therefore, ideas, plots or themes are not a subject matter of copyright law.
It was held that classification in the Communal G.O. is on the ground of religion, race and caste. The classification in the Communal G.O. is in abuse of the Constitution and it is a clear violation of the fundamental rights under article 29(2). It w
The Supreme Court said that Article 21 could be invoked only upon a complete deprivation and not upon restriction of movement. The SC said that word ‘law’ in Article 21 could not mean rules of natural justice. These rules were vague and ambiguous and
The Supreme Court laid down the process/ certain basic requirements to be followed in all cases of arrest or detention till legal provisions are made in that behalf as a measure to prevent custodial violence.
Before the judgment, there was no structured formulation to grant compensation in case of custodial deaths. There were numerous cases where no or very little compensation was granted in such cases. The decision in Nilabati Behara v. the State of Oris
It can be concluded from the present judgment that the terms “assignment” and “licence” are distinct and not interchangeable. Section 19 of the Copyright Act mentions the conditions to be fulfilled for the assignment of copyright whereas Section 30 o
The present case puts forward the principle of breach of confidentiality very explicitly in the case of copying a concept or creative idea.
It is concluded from the present judgment that the exclusive right available to the copyright owner under Section 14(d) of the Act is to copy the recording of a film. It is, therefore, clear that the expression ‘to make a copy of the film’ means maki
According to the SC, the HC also erred in granting a sum of Rs 50,000/- only towards future medical expenses. The SC has pointed out that the appellant would require 3 more replacement of the artificial left leg during his life time. The SC considere
Section 188 CrPC deals with offences committed outside India. In the present case it was held by the Supreme Court that if the accused is not an Indian citizen and the crime committed overseas, then none of the conditions given under Section 4 of the
